NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf" target="_blank">Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

Having fun with the shadowboxing party, righties? You sound like Beavis & Butthead snickering about how math is stupid. This is an example of science. Data shows problems with models. Change models. You aren't suggesting that for a science to be trusted, all predictions must always be 100% accurate, are you? Again, this gets to how much and at what rate man's actions cause warming. The underlying theories of how warming works have not been disproven. Even if you section off 1998-2008 and note that those particular years did not show the warming trend of a larger number years around them.Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow

Faking the data to make the model appear to work is the Democratic way!

"alarmist" = writerly bias CO2 isn't the only man-induced pollutant affecting the climate, hence the plural: greenhouse gas ses. Atmospheric heat loss (much less within only ten years) is but a single data point out of many applicable to climate science. Anyone who uses a single study or model to make their case knows less than nothing about the scientific method.Posted by MattyScornD

We were supposed to be living underground by now with skin cancers in the 60-70%'s.

Why do people latch on to something and refuse to give it up? On both sides.

And I am still waiting for someone to prove that MAN MADE global warming exists.

Has anyone noticed that the left has abandoned that approach? Now it is just that global warming exists. It is the same tactic used with immigration. The debate isn't about illegal immigration, just immigration.

Now we are just talking about global warming, not man made global warming.

This is an example of science. Data shows problems with models. Change models.

We agree and that's what we've been saying all along. What these alleged scientists have been doing is altering the data to fit the model instead of tossing the model and coming up with a new theory. If it were only a question of doing good science what they've done would be bad enough. The problem is that governmant and super-government agencies have based truly bad public policy on what amounts to scientific fraud.

The underlying theories of how warming works have not been disproven.

That's obviously not the point. The point is that the underlying theories have yet to be proven and it's looking more and more that they will never be. The point is not to base massive wealth transfer schemes on unproven science.

"alarmist" = writerly bias

Right, and I'll just bet that you've been pointing out the "writerly bias" every time that the word "denier" was used to describe a skeptic.